Tilbage til forsiden
ikke en illustration fra Carsten Jensens bog: ”Vi - de
druknede”, men fra den rettergang med ”gå planken ud-metoden”,
som anvendtes i forbindelse med afstraffelsen af
fødevareminister Hans Christian Skidt, transport- og CO2-
minister Flemming Hansen og forureningsfinansieringsminister
Thor Pedersen. De havde alle tre gjort sig skyldige i alvorlige
forbrydelser mod menneskeheden ved undladelsessynder
Sea and climate –
change the course (speech app. 20 minutes)
The purpose of the
Danish Society for a Living Sea.
support a nature friendly fishery
nature friendly fishery is almost only pursued by coastal
The Danish Society
for a Living Sea has as its purpose and task to protect the life
of the sea.
We will fight the degrading of the biodiversity in the sea.
Our purpose is also to support an ecologically sustainable
From that follows,
that we show solidarity with the fishermen who fish responsibly
in harmony with nature. In Denmark there is only a few of this
kind of fishermen left. We almost only find such fishermen in
coastal fishery. Coastal fishery is very widespread in the third
world. This is under stronger and stronger pressure from the
fishing fleet, from the rich countries. Anyway, the worst
perspectives for these coastal fisheries arise from the expected
considers the fishermen who fish in a nature friendly manner to
be part of nature.
Living Sea is an
environmental organisation (a small one), which at timers
disagrees with the big environmental organisations, so as World
Wildlife Foundation, Greenpeace and the associations of nature
conservation, because Living Sea includes the responsible
fisherman as a part of nature. The Society is characterized by
the membership of contemporary and former fishing skippers. We
cannot at all accept the public opinion that fishermen as ONE
group is responsible for the over-exploitation of the resources
of the sea and the destruction of nature under water.
A current example
is a conflict with WWF.
The conflict is between “a resource management perspective” and
“a fisherman behaviour perspective”.
wants to introduce the MSC eco-labelling. The MSC is Marine
Stewardship Council, an organisation founded by Unilever and WWF.
At the same time WWF has released a consumer guide in Sweden, a
guide to help consumers to shop fish from sustainable fisheries.
WWF in Denmark will release their guide this year in August. The
guide recommends consumers to avoid, shopping codfish caught in
the North Sea, because this stock is overexploited. The guide
instead recommends consumers to buy Pollack from the waters
around Alaska. Alaskan Pollack may be caught also by trawlers
using huge iron shovels and heavy fishing gear. This a fishing
method which under no circumstance is sustainable.
Although the North
Sea cod stock in general is over-exploited, the reality is that
in the north eastern part of the North Sea, outside North West
Jutland, there is an abundance of codfish. Daily each big vessel
catches hundreds of boxes of codfish, with 40-50 kilos per box,
unintentionally, and discards them. When I ask representatives
from WWF, if it is their real opinion that a fisherman who uses
nature friendly fishing gear and has a legal quota of codfish,
should abstain from catching his quota, the answer is “Yes”.
This means that his quota by all probability will be caught by
vessels using more destructive fishing gear by the end of the
year. When I explain that to WWF, they still claim that
consumers should not buy codfish from the North Sea, even though
the codfish are caught by fishermen using nature friendly
fishing gear. I have to ask: “Where is the solidarity with
fishermen – fishermen with respect for the law - who try to stay
responsible to nature. It is a very difficult problem.
Off course we in
Living Sea believe that a fishing skipper in principle should
only go out fishing on fish stocks, which are in good conditions
and sustainable, but in practical life it must be the government
and the administration together with international
organisations, which can make the borders for the fishery.
And when I after
that dialogue ask: “Why is the fuel consumption in relation to
the catch not taken in as a parameter in this Eco labelling, in
a situation with the great threat from the climate changes?”,
then the answer is, that you should not mix the climate problems
with the consumer’s choice of fish. The energy problem has to
wait, the people from WWF believe. Our opinion in Living Sea is
that such an approach is the same as giving up on environmental
politics altogether! We find that this unserious attitude helps
the brutal fishery and harms the sustainable coastal fishery. We
know that the fuel consumption in the fishery is increasing. We
know that the fishing vessels are going to be bigger and bigger.
We know that bigger engine power, more destruction of nature on
the seabed simultaneously means less economy left to the small
and poor coastal societies around the world.
The rich world’s present to the poor in the 3. World.
first time I heard about “the green house effect” was 1969. I
remember that I was chocked. I was thinking very much of that in
the following years. Naturally the shock was temporarily more in
the background, because of daily family life and fishing in
Kattegat and The North Sea. But I can tell you that in the last
10 years, this information, which I heard for the first time in
the end of the sixties has been a daily and increasing anxiety.
Now everybody is able to see that what was considered merely as
theories for many years is now already reality.
fisherman is not able to move after the fish. That goes for the
Nordic countries, as well as for the poor coastal societies all
over the world. Fishing villages will be flooded, stocks will
move and worst of all: all coral reefs will be bleached down in
the same way as the microscopic lime animals, who are extremely
important as basic component of the marine food-chain, will
disappear. We are talking about an incomprehensible catastrophe.
The dimensions of that catastrophe will go beyond the world
wars. And it is we in the industrialized world who are
leaders are the responsible to change the course!
course at the beginning of industrialism and a long time
forward, all these consequences for the world were not possible
to take into consideration. But since knowledge has become
available, all of us living in the rich countries are
fundamentally responsible. Naturally the political leaders, who
are elected, have the most responsibility. They are elected for
the leadership in the societies. But we have elected them. I
feel rather sure that our grandchildren and the survivors on the
same age in the poor parts of the world are going to judge us
harshly as responsible, if we fail to act in time.
Some of the most
dramatic consequences that are actually discussed seriously
among scientists are so devastating that we need to look for
some of the worst failures of human kind to find comparisons. If
we don’t act to prevent such consequences, it can be compared to
the failure to prevent the tragic outcome of the world wars of
the past century. Maybe you will not like this comparison, but
isn’t the reaction the same? We duck our heads and hope that it
all passes without our involvement.
When the liner,
Copenhagen – Oslo, went on the rocks of Kullen.
that all of you know the story from the sixties, when the
helmsman again and again said to the officer on watch, that the
big liner was going to run aground if the officer kept on course
and speed. But the officer did not care for any objections from
an inferior sailor. The helmsman followed the order. With great
harm the passenger ship entered the granite rocks of Kullen.
This story serves
as an illustration of what we are now confronting. Many – laymen
and scientists – cry about, that our world is on a course for
catastrophe, but the people we have elected to be on the helm do
nothing serious to change the course. They make speeches, and
they travel to Greenland, but a real changing of the course is a
less fashionable affair. We must be ready for a time to bring
the ship and the crew into hard weather in order to round the
point. The population of the rich world by far has the greatest
share of the ownership of the ship, and therefore we must have
the courage and drive to enter the unpleasant stormy sea in
order to pass the point and save the world from the
We members of
Living Sea want during our campaign: “Sea and Climate – change
the course!” to take part in a mutiny against the bad skippers
of the world.
Courageously and to the best of our ability – but still humbly –
we from our place in Living Sea will take part in the battle in
order to convince as much as possible in our democratic society
that something must happen – here and now! That is the best, we
can do. We have now started a campaign, which will be both
seriously informative and attentive in environmental policy, but
also positive and full of hope. Because if we lose the belief
that we are able to reduce the catastrophe through action, then
we give ourselves up to that greedily self-satisfaction, which
is so predominant in the rich countries. We will not be able to
change the course, if we do not change our values. We in the
rich world are forced to invent or reinvent simpler values of
life – values, that we actual find in many costal fishery
societies in the poor part of the world. We have to acquire
other ideas of happiness.
The contents of the
For good reasons, we in Living Sea do not speak about what
should happen on the land. This task other organisations has to
perform. We want to speak about, what happens on the sea. Our
organisation, of course, does not involve all expertise, but we
tell about the reliable information available. If some of the
dark prognoses should not become reality as thousand of
scientist and we naive members of Living Sea believe, then we
all can be very happy. But under no circumstances do we dare to
take the chance to support the opinion that it will not be worth
while to make a radical effort, to work hard, because it may be
turn out so badly as expected. This attitude is too dangerous.
Until now this attitude has been very bad for the work to
prevent the climate changes.
The core in the
campaign of Living Sea is 4 themes:
The forecast for the local sea environment round Denmark
and the consequences.
The prognoses for the global marine environment.
The expected consequences for the coastal fishermen’s
societies in the 3. World.
How will the Danish fishery and the fishery of the
industrialised countries develop, if the fishery should go on in
a sustainable way in relation to the climate changes? What shall
be banned in the actual development and how shall it be changed?
At issue are solidarity and charity.
We in Living Sea
demand that the climate changes and their possible prevention
must be placed on the top of the political agenda.
not the actual situation. Just a few days ago, the Danish
government has presented a new tax proposal. After a lot of
Danish ministers have been in Ileuses in Greenland by the Ice
firth together with world-famous political top leaders and they
have promoted their interest in the climate problems, the Danish
government presented a very, very weak proposal in relation to
green taxes – and instead increased the perspective for private
consumption, just as they continue to promote private transport.
We in Living Sea
want to do our best to engage as mush as possible in the coastal
fishermen’s growing problems now and into the future.
we will do it with our fishing vessel – now environment ship,
the M/S Anton - as base. We want it to be by fantasy and
humour – but with seriousness as the background.
We insist in our
campaign: “Sea and Climate – change the course!” to keep the
leaders of the society to their promises and responsibility.
politicians shall not be able to stay in peace and quite. The
climate problems and their prevention shall be placed on the top
of the agenda. We will remind them again and again!
går det med kampagnen?
Vi er i
Levende Hav meget begejstrede over, at kampagnen er kommet i
gang. Vi kom godt fra start med arrangementet i København og den
efterfølgende tur til ”Brød og Fisk- dagene” i Lübæk var meget
vellykkede. Det betyder antagelig, at kampagnen vil gæste flere
Østersøhavne til næste år.
Anton i Grenå. Meningen var ellers, at Anton straks skulle have
fortsat til Hirtshals. Her var formand Knud inviteret til at
deltage og komme med et oplæg.
Knud fået et fælt skinnebenssår, og læger og behjertede kvinde
har forbudt ham at gøre andet end at sidde i en stol med benet
oppe. Knud måtte derfor lade kutteren ligge og anvende jernbane.
Oplæget kommer på hjemmesiden.
meningen, at tilstedeværelsen i Hirtshals med Anton skulle have
indledt en ”dialogture” om havmiljø og klimaændringer til
forskellige fiskerihavne i Danmark.
blive iværksat, så snart Knud er klar.
Knuds oplæg på ”Kyst og Fisk” (IFM Nordsøøcentret og Ålborg
Universitet) bliver sat på hjemmesiden.
arbejder vi med at fremstille en større plancheudstilling. Den
første del forventes at være klar til vor deltagelse i ”Danmarks
Sociale Forum” i København sidste weekend i september.